View Single Post
Old 10-22-2008, 08:56 PM   #15
Bluenoser
Hall Of Famer
 
Bluenoser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In The Moment
Posts: 14,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange View Post
Yes, but it's more than that: there is no such thing as exclusive territories. That means anyone can set up a team in a city, regardless of how many teams may already be there. With no territorial monopoly, clubs have to remain competitive on the field (rink) or else they risk losing market share to the competing teams in the area.

The Maple Leafs are a pretty good example of what happens when a team has a territorial monopoly over a hungry market: it has no incentive to put anything on the ice other than a barely sufficient team because its monopoly ensures it will get ever hockey dollar in the market.
They only have a territorial monoply according to themselves and some of the other NHL owners. If someone ever had the gonads and $$$ to pursue it in court, I somehow doubt it would be cut and dried like MLSE seems to believe it would be.

And I seriously pray the NHL never goes to a European football structure. It's fine the way it is.

Last edited by Bluenoser; 10-22-2008 at 08:58 PM.
Bluenoser is offline   Reply With Quote